Poll: Does 0.99 Recurring = 1

Does 0.99 Recurring = 1

  • Yes

    Votes: 225 42.5%
  • No

    Votes: 304 57.5%

  • Total voters
    529
Status
Not open for further replies.
As I posted in the other thread if you want to be pedantic then outside of maths they are different because they are written down differently.

1 is not equal to 0.9r in the same way that a is not equal to A.

They are interchangable in every sense but still have a discriptive factor that differentiates them.
 
Originally posted by Haly
You seem to be labelling me into a very small group of people there ;) I know it's rare, but some students are interested in more than just the subject they're doing and as I've posted in a previous thread I never originally planned to do Media Studies there.
I'm interested in Physics. I'm interested in Chemistry, just last week I surprised a Biology student friend by knowing about the interaction of certain brain chemicals and their effects on neuron receptors. You aren't the only one in such a "boat", but I do not pressume to know enough to outdo 3rd year students.
Originally posted by Haly
I'll predict you assume I'm lying but I really don't care what you think anymore. It's not such a big deal to me that I have to be right in the mind of everyone.
3 lines. I simply ask for 3 lines. Is that too much to show "The big headed AlphaNumeric, who thinks he knows all" that he's wrong. If you know your stuff to which you linked, it'll take you 30 seconds to quote Ashtons Theorum and show me up. It'll make me look like a fool, and no one will ever beleive me again. Is 30 seconds too much to embarrase me. I'm sure Xenoxoide will love you forever if you make me look an idiot.
Originally posted by Haly
This debate has already reached the point where everyone is rehashing old points because neither side are willing to back down and keep their dignity.
Giving the proper definition of a Banach space hasn't been done yet ;)

In the words of Semour Skinner, "Prove me wrong kids, prove me wrong!" :D
 
Originally posted by daz
1 - 0.9 = 0.1. There's one zero before the one.

1 - 0.99 = 0.01. There's two zeroes before the one.

1- 0.999 = 0.001. There's three zeroes before the one.

Logic would dictate that if you have an infinite number of nines, you would therefore have an infinite number of zeroes before the one. Which would be zero, because you'd never get to the one.

I'll agree with that, but just because there's no logical way of defining the position in which the 1 appears does not mean that it does not exist.
 
Originally posted by Andy100


They are interchangable in every sense but still have a discriptive factor that differentiates them.

If I have X = 2, and Y = 2, then it follows that X = Y.

Just because they are called different things, doesn't mean they're not equal.
 
Originally posted by Xenoxide
I'll agree with that, but just because there's no logical way of defining the position in which the 1 appears does not mean that it does not exist.

Well, if you have an infinite number of zeroes before the one, the 1 *never* comes. Try writing it out - you can't. You'll end up with zero.
 
Originally posted by Xenoxide
So because we lack the terminology to define it, it does not exist?
No, Banach space is well defined. I mean that certain people who claim to understand such things haven't defined them properly yet. I'm just waiting for them to do so ;)
 
Originally posted by Xenoxide
I'll agree with that, but just because there's no logical way of defining the position in which the 1 appears does not mean that it does not exist.

Care to elaborate on how you wish to logically define it?
 
Thanks for that Alpha:) , I have not reached your maths level yet, just applied to Oxford for maths!!!!

I would also like to say that 1r = 2r =3r = infinity, so things can look different and be the same. In fact, there are an infinite number of numbers that equal infinity!!!
 
Just because they are called different things, doesn't mean they're not equal.

No but they are not identical in every way.

So the definition of equal is the problem there. So equal as in they add up but not identical.

But that's the only difference there is that I can see...
 
Guys do you not think your going way over the top here???????? Its just a number and after 600 posts can you not agree. Its all sounding way to geek, and by the way 0.9r does infact equal 1 it has been proven mathmatically.
 
Originally posted by $piderweb
Thanks for that Alpha:) , I have not reached your maths level yet, just applied to Oxford for maths!!!!
Feel free tp MSN or email me with questions, ideas or comments about your interviews, exams or tests. I am always open to talking to people who plan on taking their maths further :)
Originally posted by Xenoxide
A number which is so infinitely small that it cannot be defined by mathematics as we know it.
Maths as you know it, we can create as small a number as we like ;)
 
It can be defined at tending to a limit. If its getting smaller and smaller.

That is well know mathematics.
 
Originally posted by Andy100
No but they are not identical in every way.

So the definition of equal is the problem there. So equal as in they add up but not identical.

So now you're using the definition of the word "identical". Fair enough. They're not identical in the english sense of the word. So you're saying that although 0.999r = 1, they don't look the same. Fair enough.

We, on the other hand are using the mathematical definition of the word "equal".
 
Originally posted by AlphaNumeric
Feel free tp MSN or email me with questions, ideas or comments about your interviews, exams or tests. I am always open to talking to people who plan on taking their maths further :)

Thanks..........but how do I find out your MSN!?
 
But you asked for a a reason that wasn't mathematical and that's the one I gave?

You can agree with it I presume?


btw I voted that 1 = 0.9r ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom